www.nature.com/scientificreports
Different coding strategies for
the perception of stable and
changeable facial attributes
Jessica Taubert
1, David Alais
1& David Burr
2,3Perceptual systems face competing requirements: improving signal-to-noise ratios of noisy images, by integration; and maximising sensitivity to change, by differentiation. Both processes occur in human vision, under different circumstances: they have been termed priming, or serial dependencies, leading to positive sequential effects; and adaptation or habituation, which leads to negative sequential effects. We reasoned that for stable attributes, such as the identity and gender of faces, the system should integrate: while for changeable attributes like facial expression, it should also engage contrast mechanisms to maximise sensitivity to change. Subjects viewed a sequence of images varying simultaneously in gender and expression, and scored each as male or female, and happy or sad. We found strong and consistent positive serial dependencies for gender, and negative dependency for expression, showing that both processes can operate at the same time, on the same stimuli, depending on the attribute being judged. The results point to highly sophisticated mechanisms for optimizing use of past information, either by integration or differentiation, depending on the permanence of that attribute.
Detecting change, particularly in facial expression, is fundamental for perception. Adaptation to the prevailing level of any attribute – which leads to negative aftereffects – is thought to be a core mechanism for optimizing sensitivity to change1,2. Adaptation has been observed both for basic visual attributes, such as motion3 and
orien-tation4, and also for more complex representations, such as numerosity5 and faces6–8.
On the other hand, in a constant but noisy environment, the system can profit by integrating successive views of images, which would produce positive rather than negative serial dependencies. Positive serial dependencies between successive images have been observed for some time. Repetition priming is a well known effect in per-ception of faces9, and many other attributes10–13. More recently, serial dependencies have been measured more
directly, showing that the current image is often biased towards the previous, in orientation14, numerosity15 facial
identity16 and, most recently, pulchritude17.
What determines whether assimilation or contrastive effects prevail, and how do the two opposing mecha-nisms interact? One factor is certainly stimulus conditions: strong, salient, high-contrast, long-duration stimuli tend to lead to negative aftereffects, while brief, less salient low-contrast stimuli lead to positive aftereffects18–20.
But do they also depend on the type of information being encoded? For example, attributes that tend to be stable over time may be more prone to integration, while for changeable attributes, the system may gain more from con-trastive adaptation to maximize sensitivity to change, especially if the change is functionally important. We tested this idea with perception of human faces, investigating, at the same time, perception of gender and expression. Gender is a stable attribute, which should not change with successive viewings, and should integrate. Expressions, on the other hand, are changeable, typically lasting between 0.5 and 4 seconds21, and important information is
conveyed in the change. Although integration could be important for expression, it is also essential to differentiate successive images, to maximize the detection of change.
Results
With morphing techniques, we created a 5 × 5 two-dimensional gender/expression space from four different pairs of identities, one male and one female, each with a happy or sad expression. The stimuli varied smoothly from male to female along one dimension and happy to sad along the other (see example in Fig. 1). The stimuli
1School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Australia. 2Department of Neuroscience, University of Florence, Italy. 3School of Psychology, University of Western, Australia. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to D.B. (email: dave@ in.cnr.it)
received: 27 April 2016 Accepted: 02 August 2016 Published: 01 September 2016
were presented in pseudo-random order to nine subjects, who responded on each trial “male” or “female”, and also “happy” or “sad”.
Figure 2A,B show the average results as a function of morph strength of the current trial, separately for gen-der and expression. Responses for both attributes varied smoothly with morph-strength, and were well fit with a cumulative Gaussian function (black curves). The other symbols and their fitted psychometric functions show results binned according to the morph-strength of the previous trial. It is apparent the curves are systematically displaced in both cases. However, the direction of the displacement was opposite for the two attributes: for gender they shift towards the previous stimulus (see legend); for expression they shift in the opposite direction.
The psychometric functions for expression (Fig. 2B) are steeper than those for gender, suggesting that, for this particular stimulus set, expression was easier to discriminate than gender. As this could influence the results, we repeated the experiment (on a partially new subject set), sampling expression at a finer scale (see methods), to yield psychometric functions of similar steepness as for gender (Fig. 2C). Again, the functions are separated with the same ordering as the functions in Fig. 2B, with full-strength expression.
Figure 2D–F show more clearly the effect of the previous stimulus on the response, plotting average response (on a Probit axis) as a function of strength of previous trial, separately for each morph-strength of the current stimulus. For gender (Fig. 2D), all curves show a strong positive dependency on the previous stimulus, resulting in positive slopes of the linear regressions. Although the strongest effects occur with the most ambiguous stim-ulus (the androgynous face: red symbols and lines), all regression lines have positive slope (slopes given below). As has been shown in the past for other visual attributes, such as orientation4 and numerosity5, the effects tend
to saturate when the previous stimulus differs too much from the current stimulus. The responses for expression (Fig. 2E,F) also showed a strong dependency on the previous stimulus for the most ambiguous stimulus (morph strength 0.5). But here the dependency was clearly negative: if the previous face was happy, the current face was more likely to appear sad, and vice versa).
To calculate the magnitude and significance of the serial dependencies, we first converted the responses to equivalent morph strength, shown on the right-hand ordinate. This is a measure that takes account of the rela-tionship between morph-strength and percent female or sad. Essentially, we used the black curves of Fig. 2A–C as a lookup table and read off the morph-strength corresponding to percent response (see methods for details). We estimated the magnitude of the effect of previous stimuli (relative to the effect of the current stimulus) from the slope of the best-fitting linear regression of these data. The slopes of the regressions for gender (respectively for current morph-strengths ranging from 1 to 0) were: 0.32, 0.31, 0.57, 0.42 and 0.27 (all significantly different from 0, two-tailed t-tests, p < 0.01). The regression slopes for expression, using the entire range of expressions were: 0.04, − 0.03, − 0.16, + 0.005 and + 0.05 (only the slope for morph-strength 0.5 was significant, p < 0.001); and for the reduced range of expressions, the slopes of the regressions were: − 0.03, − 0.07, − 0.08, − 0.07 and + 0.01 (again, only the slope for morph-strength 0.5 was significant, p < 0.05). For further formal analyses, we considered only the responses to androgynous or neutral-expression stimuli, where the response to the current stimulus varies around 50%, free from floor or ceiling saturation effects.
We modelled serial dependencies with a simple Kalman-like filter15, where the response R
i to the current
stimulus Si (where i is trial number) is given by the weighted sum of the current stimulus, and the estimate of the
previous stimulus ˆSi 1−. = − ˆ− + Ri w Si 1i 1 w Si i (1) + = − w w where i 1 i 1 (2)
Figure 1. A representation of the 5 × 5 face-space produced from a single stimulus identity pair. The
stimuli vary in expression (rows) and gender (columns). Note these stimuli are illustrative examples prepared for publication: the female/male stimulus pairs used in the experiment were taken from the NimStim imagebase.
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Figure 2. Serial dependencies in judging gender and expression. (A) Psychometric functions for judging
gender as a function of morph strength. Open black circles with black psychometric function show average data, coloured squares data divided according to the morph-strength of the previous trial (orange 1; green 0.75; red 0.5; blue 0.25; magenta 0). The responses were fitted with cumulative Gaussian functions (colour-coded). The standard deviation of the fit to the average data was 0.32. (B) Psychometric functions for judging expression as a function of morph strength. The standard deviation of the fit to the average data was 0.15. Conventions as for A. (C) Psychometric functions for judging expression as a function of morph strength, using stimuli sampled at half-scale: the 0 and 1 strengths were the same as 0.25 and 0.75 in B. The standard deviation of the fit to the average data was 0.26. Conventions as for A. (D) Same data as A, plotted as percept response “female” as a function of morph-strength of previous trial, for five different morph-strengths of the current stimulus (from top to: orange 1; green 0.75; red 0.5; blue 0.25; magenta 0). Data are plotted on a probit scale, expressed as “percent female” on the left ordinate, and equivalent morph strength on the right (z-scores times the standard deviation the psychometric functions). The lines passing through the data show the best fitting regressions, yielding the following slopes: 0.32, 0.31, 0.57, 0.42 and 0.27. Calculations of weights were made from the curve measured at 0.5 morph-strength (red symbols and line), using eqn. 5. (E) Same data as B, plotted as percept response “sad” as a function of morph-strength of previous trial. All other details as for D. The slopes of the best-fitting regressions were, for current morph-strengths ranging from 1 to 0 were: 0.04, − 0.03, − 0.16, + 0.005 and + 0.05. (F) Same data as C, plotted as percept response “sad” as a function of morph-strength of previous trial. All other details as for D. The slopes of the best-fitting regressions were: − 0.03, − 0.07, − 0.08, − 0.07 and + 0.01.
−
ˆSi 1 is assumed to be approximated by Ri−1, so the procedure is recursive. wi can be considered the Kalman weight.
The weight of the previous stimulus (wi−1) was calculated from the slopes of the best fitting regressions to
individ-ual subject data (equation 5 in methods). Figure 3A shows the data for 9 subjects, plotting weights for expression (full-strength) against those for gender. Dependency on the previous trial was strong and very consistent. For all subjects the weights were positive for gender, with an average value of 0.36. The weights for expression were neg-ative for all but one subject, with an average value of − 0.20. Both were highly significant (t tests, p < 10−4 for
gender, p < 10−3 for expression). The weighting for half-strength expression was less than in the main condition
(− 0.10), but again highly significant (p = 0.001).
Figure 3B summarises the serial effects for gender and expression (full-strength) as a function of trial position. The effects of gender were significantly positive even for stimuli that preceded the test by two trials (p < 0.0001 for 1-back trials, p = 0.04 for 2-back trials); for expression, the effects remained significant even for three trials back (p = 0.0007, 0.021 & 0.026 for trials one-, two- and three-back). Importantly, there was no dependence on future trials for either attribute, showing that the correlations are causal, not artefactual. The dashed lines show exponen-tial decay (expected because of the recursive nature of the model), anchored at the weights for trials preceding the current stimulus (equation 6). As the model predictions are based on the estimates of the previous trial strength, and those estimates are in turn influenced by those two trials ago, the process is iterative and should propagate over trials with an exponential decay. The data follow this prediction reasonably well.
Discussion
This study demonstrates clear serial dependencies for gender and expression in the perception of faces, adding to previous reports of effects on face identity16 and attractiveness17. However, we show that not all attributes of
the stimulus carry over from trial to trial in the same way: gender showed strong positive assimilation, while expression showed strong negative contrast effects. As the size of the stimuli varied over a 50% range during the experiment (± 25% size change from trial to trial), it is unlikely that either the positive or negative dependencies were generated by local adaption to luminance, contrast or local, low-level features such as orientation.
Positive serial dependencies can be advantageous to vision, integrating previous with current estimates to improve signal-to noise ratios. In Bayesian terms, the previous stimulus acts like a prior, improving performance and minimizing “over-fitting” (the tendency of a system to follow variations due to noise, rather than real change22–24). In this sense it acts like a Kalman filter in systems control. Within this framework, perception can be
considered a form of predictive coding25,26, where the previous estimate (
−
ˆSi 1 in equation 1) is the prediction to be combined with the current data.
However, the underlying assumption for all these theories is that the world does not change from trial to trial: while this is a reasonable assumption for gender, and for many other attributes such as identity, race and age, it is less reasonable for expression, which by its very nature is rapidly changeable: indeed, much of the information can be in the change. Assimilation with previous trials could often be detrimental, diluting sudden changes in expres-sion that could convey important information. As change in expresexpres-sion can be fundamental for social interac-tions, the system may be optimized to detect change, using the basic mechanism to enhance change detection:
Figure 3. Weighting given to previous trials when judging gender and expression. (A) Weights of the
previous trial for individual subjects, calculated from fitting the data at morph strength 0.5 with a linear regression (see red curves of Fig. 2D,E), and applying eqn. 5. Weights for gender are plotted on the abscissa, expression (full-strength) on the ordinate. The star shows weights calculated from data pooled over subjects with ± 1 standard error bars. (B)Weights as a function of trial position, for gender (red) and expression (blue). The significance levels (one-tailed t-test) are indicated: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.001; ***p < 0.001. The values for
p for gender were: < 0.0001, 0.041, 0.44, 0.57; expression: 0.0007, 0.021, 0.026, 0.54. The dashed curves are
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
adaptation, which causes to contrast effects. Adaption has been clearly demonstrated for many aspects of face perception under a variety of conditions7,8,27,28.
Distributed models of face perception propose separate representations of stable properties, such as identity and gender, from changeable properties such as emotional expression29,30. Both imaging and lesion studies
sug-gest that stable features are processed in the fusiform gyrus, while changeable aspects are processed in STS30–32.
Although not all agree with this dissociation33,34, if permanent and changeable aspects of face perception were
subserved by separate neural circuitry, it is plausible that the different circuits would integrate information in a different way: stable traits profit from integration, whereas contrast-mechanisms optimize the detection of change.
The above discussion suggests that perception of gender and expression use qualitatively different integrating strategies. This is certainly plausible, given the evidence that they are analysed by different neural structures. Alternatively, however, assimilative integration may also occur with the perception of expression, but on a much shorter timescale, to allow for their changeable nature. There is a hint in our results that both assimilation and contrast effects may occur with expression, as the negative effects are much weaker and more variable than the positive effects. After converting to Kalman filter weights, the average weight for gender was 0.37 (SD = 0.08), compared with − 0.19 (SD = 0.13) for expression (significant difference in magnitude, t(8) = 3.53, p < 0.01). There could be many reasons for these differences, but one possibility is that they may reflect the simultaneous actions of both assimilation and contrast effects with expression, in part cancelling each other out, and leading to greater variability between subjects. Expressions typically last between 0.5 and 4 seconds21. As each trial in the
current experiment lasted 2 seconds on average, the duration was consistent both with constant and with chang-ing expression in natural viewchang-ing. It would be interestchang-ing to repeat the study under conditions where the interval between pairs of trials could be shortened to sub-second levels, and also lengthened, to see if assimilation for expression may dominate at shorter time intervals.
Serial dependencies are usually considered to be automatic perceptual processes, rather than cognitive pro-cesses under voluntary control. They are often spatially specific13,14, automatic and do not lend themselves to
intellectualizing12. However, the current study shows that although serial dependencies are not under conscious
control, they can vary in how they optimize performance, within the same stimulus. For stable attributes such as gender the system fuses past with present information; for changeable attributes, such as expression, contrast effects are at work, presumably to facilitate detection of change.
An interesting question is how the perceptual system learns which aspects are permanent and which are transitory, and at what developmental stage this distinction is learnt. We have tested the theory only with faces, important naturally occurring stimuli that contain both permanent and changeable attributes, allowing us to test our prediction within the same single stimulus, at the same time. At this stage we cannot be certain that the principle will generalise to other stimulus types, or whether it is restricted to gender and expression. It would be interesting to repeat the experiment with other forms of stimuli, with permanent and changing attributes, to test how the principle generalizes to other non-facial stimuli. This should also allow us to study if and how integration strategies are learned, and whether they can change by manipulating the changeability of the stimuli.
Methods
Stimuli and procedure.
We constructed four stimulus sets varying in both gender and expression from four different identity pairs (each pair comprised one male and one female, each with a happy and sad expression), chosen from the Nimstim imagebase35. All stimuli were gray-scale, with matched average luminance. For eachmale and female pair we first generated two cross-gender morph continua (separately for the happy and sad faces), extending from all-male through an androgynous stimulus to all-female, in 5 steps (female strength 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0), defining the extremes of the expression morph-space. Using exactly the same procedure, for each level of gender, we morphed the 5 happy stimuli with the corresponding 5 sad stimuli (again in 5 steps) to produce 25 stimuli in total for each stimulus pair (Fig. 1, left panel). For the second experiment, expression was sampled at a finer scale (half that of the first study) by using the 0.25 and 0.75 morphs of the main experiment as extremes (relabelled 0 and 1), and interpolating between them and the 0.5 morphs to create the intermediate stimuli. The gender strengths remained the same as for the main experiment. All morphing was performed with
Psychomorph software36, operating on 388 points positioned on specific facial landmarks.
For each of the identity pairs, the 25 stimuli were shuffled separately eight times and concatenated to produce a string of 200 images, to be displayed sequentially in a single session. Four sessions were run for each subject, ran-domizing order of the identity-pairs. Each trial began with a white fixation cross (10 pixels in width), drawn at the centre of a medium grey screen and visible for 700 ms before being replaced by a face stimulus. During the trial, a face was displayed for 250 ms under control of MATLAB on a CRT monitor (screen resolution 1024 × 768, 100 Hz refresh rate), viewed from distance of 57 cm. The base size of each stimulus was 12.75° in height, but size was ran-domized between trials, to minimize local adaptation effects: one third were 25% smaller, one third 25% larger.
Subjects were instructed to respond whether they perceived the face as male or female and also happy or sad, as quickly and accurately as possible, simultaneously on a 2 × 2 response box. We first piloted the idea of respond-ing separately to gender or expression in different blocks but decided that both judgments should be made simul-taneously in a single response on a four-button response box. Reaction times were similar for the two techniques (562 cf 573 ms for two pilot subjects), suggesting they had no difficulty in making the responses simultaneously. Consistent with this, the group average for all subjects with the four-button box was 590 ms (SD = 70 ms), giving an average time between trials of 1300 ms). On debriefing, subjects reported giving equal weight to both attrib-utes, and not to have systematically decided on one before the other, a sensible strategy as both dimensions were randomly interleaved at various morph strengths so that there was never a reliably ‘easy’ dimension to judge first.
Subjects.
Nine subjects (5 female) participated in the main experiment, 8 of whom were naïve to the goals of the experiment (average age = 25.8 years, SD = 6). Two of these participated in the supplementary experi-ment, together with an additional 4 new subjects (average age = 29.2 years, SD = 4.5). All had normal or corrected-to-normal vision. All subjects gave written consent after being informed of the nature of the experi-ment (but not of its experiexperi-mental aims). Experiexperi-mental protocol was approved by the Human Ethics Committee at the University of Sydney, in accordance with the Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki).Data analysis.
We analysed individual data for each subject, and also pooled data, separately for gender and expression. We first plotted psychometric functions, the probability of reporting “female” or “sad” as a function of gender or expression strength. Data were fitted with cumulative Gaussian functions (Fig. 2A,B) of variable mean and standard deviations.The data of Fig. 2D–F are plotted on a probit scale (indicated on the left ordinates), which is the inverse of the cumulative normal distribution. Data are expressed both as percent “female” or “sad”, and as “equivalent morph strength”: this is the morph-strength that corresponds to that percentage female or sad, derived from averaged data. Essentially, for any given percentage value of the black curves of Fig. 2A–C, read off the corresponding morph-strength from the abscissa. In other words, invert the cumulative gaussian psychometric function. In practice, this is achieved by multiplying the probit of the probability by the standard deviation of the fitted psy-chometric functions, and adding the mean.
= µ + σΦ−
M p( ) 1( )p (3)
where M is the equivalent morph strength, μ and σ the mean and standard deviation of the best-fitting cumulative
gaussian, and Φ −1 the probit function (inverse cumulative gaussian).
We modelled serial dependencies with the Kahlman-like filter of eqn. 115. The slopes of the fitted regressions
(ρ : red lines in Fig. 2D–F) estimate the value of wi−1 relative to wi: ρ
=
−
wi 1 wi (4)
As the weights sum to unity (equation 2):
ρ ρ = + − w 1 (5) i 1
The data points of Fig. 3A were obtained from the slopes of the regressions of the individual subjects, using the standard deviations calculated from each subject’s data. The star in Fig. 3A, and all points in Fig. 3B were obtained from the pooled data. The standard errors, and the significance tests, were obtained from the individual subject data.
The exponential decays of predicted weights wk of Fig. 3B are negative exponentials passing through the value
of wi−1:
= − +.
wi w ei 1i 1 (6)
References
1. Barlow, H. B. & Földiák, P. In The Computing Neuron (eds Durbin, R., Miall, C. & Mitchinson, G.) 54–72 (Addison-Wesley, 1989). 2. Gepshtein, S., Lesmes, L. A. & Albright, T. D. Sensory adaptation as optimal resource allocation. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America 110, 4368–4373, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1204109110 (2013).
3. Addams, R. An account of a peculiar optical phenomenon seen after having looked at a moving body. London and Edinburgh
Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 5, 373–374 (1834).
4. Gibson, J. J. Adaptation, after-effect, and contrast in the perception of tilted lines. II. Simultaneous contrast and the areal restriction of the after-effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 553–569 (1937).
5. Burr, D. & Ross, J. A visual sense of number. Current biology: CB 18, 425–428, doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2008.02.052 (2008).
6. Fox, C. J. & Barton, J. J. What is adapted in face adaptation? The neural representations of expression in the human visual system.
Brain research 1127, 80–89, doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.09.104 (2007).
7. Leopold, D. A., O’Toole, A. J., Vetter, T. & Blanz, V. Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects. Nature
neuroscience 4, 89–94, doi: 10.1038/82947 (2001).
8. Clifford, C. W. & Rhodes, G. Fitting the mind to the world: Adaptation and aftereffects in high-level vision. (Oxford University Press, 2005).
9. Ellis, A. W., Young, A. W., Flude, B. M. & Hay, D. C. Repetition priming of face recognition. The Quarterly journal of experimental
psychology. A, Human experimental psychology 39, 193–210 (1987).
10. Anstis, S. & Ramachandran, V. S. Visual inertia in apparent motion. Vision research 27, 755–764 (1987).
11. Kristjansson, A. & Campana, G. Where perception meets memory: a review of repetition priming in visual search tasks. Attention,
perception & psychophysics 72, 5–18, doi: 10.3758/app.72.1.5 (2010).
12. Maljkovic, V. & Nakayama, K. Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & cognition 22, 657–672 (1994). 13. Maljkovic, V. & Nakayama, K. Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position. Perception & psychophysics 58, 977–991 (1996). 14. Fischer, J. & Whitney, D. Serial dependence in visual perception. Nature neuroscience 17, 738–743, doi: 10.1038/nn.3689 (2014). 15. Cicchini, G. M., Anobile, G. & Burr, D. C. Compressive mapping of number to space reflects dynamic encoding mechanisms, not
static logarithmic transform. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111, 7867–7872, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1402785111 (2014).
16. Liberman, A., Fischer, J. & Whitney, D. Serial dependence in the perception of faces. Current biology: CB 24, 2569–2574, doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.09.025 (2014).
17. Taubert, J., Van der Burg, E. & Alais, D. Love at second sight: Sequential dependence of facial attractiveness in an on-line dating paradigm. Scientific reports 6, 22740, doi: 10.1038/srep22740 (2016).
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
19. Kanai, R. & Verstraten, F. A. Perceptual manifestations of fast neural plasticity: motion priming, rapid motion aftereffect and perceptual sensitization. Vision research 45, 3109–3116, doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.05.014 (2005).
20. Yoshimoto, S. & Takeuchi, T. Visual motion priming reveals why motion perception deteriorates during mesopic vision. Journal of
vision 13, doi: 10.1167/13.8.8 (2013).
21. Ekman, P. Emotions revealed. 2nd edn, (Timjes Books, 2003).
22. Knill, D. C. & Pouget, A. The Bayesian brain: the role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends in neurosciences 27, 712–719, doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2004.10.007 (2004).
23. Mamassian, P., Landy, M. & Maloney, L. T. In Probabilistic Models of the Brain: Perception and Neural Function (eds Rao, R. P. N., Olshausen, B. A. & Lewicki, M. S.) 13–36 (MIT Press, 2002).
24. Kersten, D., Mamassian, P. & Yuille, A. Object perception as Bayesian inference. Annual review of psychology 55, 271–304, doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142005 (2004).
25. Friston, K. & Kiebel, S. Predictive coding under the free-energy principle. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London.
Series B, Biological sciences 364, 1211–1221, doi: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0300 (2009).
26. Rao, R. P. & Ballard, D. H. Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nature neuroscience 2, 79–87, doi: 10.1038/4580 (1999).
27. Little, A. C., DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C. & Waitt, C. Category contingent aftereffects for faces of different races, ages and species.
Cognition 106, 1537–1547, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.06.008 (2008).
28. Rhodes, G. et al. Orientation-contingent face aftereffects and implications for face-coding mechanisms. Current biology: CB 14, 2119–2123, doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2004.11.053 (2004).
29. Bruce, V. & Young, A. Understanding face recognition. British journal of psychology (London, England: 1953) 77 (Pt 3), 305–327 (1986).
30. Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A. & Gobbini, M. I. The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends in cognitive sciences
4, 223–233 (2000).
31. Winston, J. S., Henson, R. N., Fine-Goulden, M. R. & Dolan, R. J. fMRI-adaptation reveals dissociable neural representations of identity and expression in face perception. Journal of neurophysiology 92, 1830–1839, doi: 10.1152/jn.00155.2004 (2004). 32. Young, A. W., Newcombe, F., de Haan, E. H., Small, M. & Hay, D. C. Face perception after brain injury. Selective impairments
affecting identity and expression. Brain: a journal of neurology 116 (Pt 4), 941–959 (1993).
33. Rhodes, G. et al. How distinct is the coding of face identity and expression? Evidence for some common dimensions in face space.
Cognition 142, 123–137, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.05.012 (2015).
34. Calder, A. J. & Young, A. W. Understanding the recognition of facial identity and facial expression. Nature reviews. Neuroscience 6, 641–651, doi: 10.1038/nrn1724 (2005).
35. Tottenham, N. et al. The NimStim set of facial expressions: judgments from untrained research participants. Psychiatry research 168, 242–249, doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.05.006 (2009).
36. Tiddeman, B. P., Stirrat, M. R. & Perrett, D. I. Towards Realism in Facial Image Transformation: Results of a Wavelet MRF Method.
Computer Graphics Forum 24, 449–456, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8659.2005.00870.x (2005).
Acknowledgements
Supported by the Australian Research Council (Grant DP150101731 to DA & DB) and by the ERC (grant “ECSPLAIN” to M. C. Morrone).
Author Contributions
J.T., D.A. and D.B. designed the experiment, analysed the results and wrote the paper. J.T. prepared the stimuli and tested the subjects.
Additional Information
Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests.
How to cite this article: Taubert, J. et al. Different coding strategies for the perception of stable and changeable
facial attributes. Sci. Rep. 6, 32239; doi: 10.1038/srep32239 (2016).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
